GBurns

They who? I don't think that anyone can "force" you into anything except the Judge and that would depend on whether or not he has such authority. In my experience a QDRO is the end result of whatever is agreed to by the parties and possibly modified by the Judge. As JDuns pointed out this "would be a question for a family law lawyer in that jurisdiction". What has your divorce lawyer said? From your question, I am getting the feeling that you do not have 1 but your spouse does. As a result you might be just getting "bullied" since you have no representation. Self representation in such matters usually turns out to be extremely expensive. Get a lawyer experienced in divorce and divorce settlements, it is cheaper.

I don't think that it is quite fair to assume that mjb advised those clients to do as they did, he/she could have aquired them after, although from the general tone, I must admit that you did not have to make much of a stretch. Maybe its just his/her writing style. Look at what some of us have posted in the past. mjb, IRS embarassed? Ha! Why do you think that they write AODs? They will not even admit defeat in court and will not accept many decisions. Abitrary and capricious can be applied to Regs or a Ruling, I doubt that it could ever be applied to the IRC itself. Look to the actual wording of the applicable Code sections. It is very easy in an audit/examination to determine if a controlled group exists and if it involves a spouse whether the spouse is involved in the audit or not. In fact, there are very few reasons why a spouse would not be a part of any audit. Whether the examiner exercises all options and does involve the spouse is the examiner's call., but that does not mean that the spouse is not/will not/cannot be a part of the audit at any time the examiner wishes. Having a privacy policy does not mean that you cannot be held responsible or did not know. Aside from ignorance being no excuse under law, there will always be the "prudent man" standard. Imagine having a 401(k) etc which requires spousal consent, so the employer has a signature that belongs to another employee but claims that they did not know that the employees were spouses because of a privacy policy? Taking fees from clients for future work is 1 thing. Taking fees from clients with known problems but not advising them to fix them is quite another. While it could be said that that is not what they are paying for, it could very well come back and bite you.

Gary413 Maybe there has been a misinterpretaion of what the QDRO actually stated. Did you see it? Is this what is actually worded or is this someone's interpretation? On the other hand, the party in question could have stipulated that they agree to retire or stated by affidavit that they would, on that certain day. In that case the QDRO could really only be following the terms of that other agreement and is not ordering anything new, per se, by itself.

It has always been that way. Be careful in trying to exclude "relatives". What happens if the "relative" is also licensed as a provider or ordinarily provides such services?

There are many issues that the employer should consider and investigate rather than rely on a sales pitch and materials. The 401(k) is probably minor and yes it will be a multiple employer plan. I suggest that the state Dept of Insurance and the Dept that regulates PEOs be checked. Some states carry this material on their websites. I also suggest looking at the Q&A section, of BenefitsLink, titled "Who's the Employer". Whether ADP can actually reduce the WC should be verified. What will be the effect on future rates if he decides to terminate the PEO in the future? Will his rates be surcharged because of no experience? Same for GL. Will joining the PEO cause FMLA and other obligations? Is your client okay with these new regulations and responsibilities. What will be done about the other employee benefits such as the health insurance and Cafeteria Plan? You did not say how large your client was, but, the average size of a PEO client is under 15 employees and even that can be questioned. Do they have an acceptable track record with employers of the same size as your client?

What do you mean by "put their stock back to the company "? How is that done? Why would interest be paid instead of dividends? On what would the interest be paid and how is it calculated?

It helps, but it is such a change. Can you imagine how I would feel if JanetM also quoted me???????

What qualifies Dr. B to be a participant in the qualified plan of the C-corp? He is neither an employee nor officer, is he? Who is the plan of the C-corp established for?

A good question, but not 1 that I would have thought of as appearing here. It would help if you stated which regulations are of concern. I have not looked at how and if these providers are contracted, but there should be some regulations that will flow down, especially if there is a direct contract between the Federal Gov and the health care providers. I do not know for sure that there is an actual contract or it is just a status. If there is an actual contract, the Service Contract Act might be the regulation that is of most concern. But then again if there is a new law and it is anything like the HMO Act et al, it will need a good read. Maybe you should also ask one of the larger providers who also uses software vendors such as the one you are concerned about. They might have already looked at the issue.

There are a few Gotcha's that are hidden in those telephone responses which were not very complete. But you did say "in summary". IRS: Can volunteers qualify for employee benefits. DOL (wage division): The definition of interstate commerce and other items not mentioned will catch many unawares by the broad scope. Ordering online or from a catalog from anyone located in another state becomes interstate commerce. So a repair service that orders parts from GE etc engage in interstate commerce. Any large retail store of any sort will find it very difficult not to engage in interstate commerce. A copy machine repair service that send out board repair or does warranty work etc has problems. There are many gotcha's in FLSA. Workers Comp: The spouse has to be included but all included must be classed and be on the payroll. Without both the quote cannot be done and the policy would not be issued. WC quotes rates need payroll data. State labor division: Do any state laws allow unpaid employees? What was the definition of "employee" ? The definition of employee usually includes compensation for services. Actual state code and state code reference: "an individual employed by his parent or spouse" and "is a member of the employer's immediate family" would not apply here since the employer is a corporate entity. Altough owned by the spouse, it is still the corporate entity that is the employer not the spouse. You missed the state wage division regarding state minimum wages and UC. How would the spouse be reported for UC? All of this makes Lame Duck's statement even more appropriate.

It is a bad time of the year for research, but give me a few days and I will get you some cites etc. I did not think that it would be so hard to see that there must be a bona fide employer/employee relationship, and that all employees must be paid for services rendered, and only employees or ICs can render certain services, and that employees are subject to minimum wage laws, and that employee benefits are for employees. But since you need cites and case law, I will get it. WDIK A large percentage of CPAs do no taxation. According some sources (MicroMash, Wiley, Becker etc) a good percentage of CPAs do not even pass the taxation section of the Exam. You can fail that section yet still pass that Part of the Exam. So you should always make sure that the CPA is taxation competent. It does not necessarily come with the designation. Many learn taxation by other study.

taylorjeff, Are those slides public? If so can you tell me how to get them.

It should not. If the trade show is attended as a member of the public rather than as an exhibitor/sponsor/employer representative, it will be no problem. It also should not matter who pays the cost but have a public entrance ticket. Travel cost payment should not be an issue. If not done as yet the entry visa should be a visitors visa not a business classification. I do not know hat they use nowadays, but that was an issue in the 1970s and 1980s. Unfortunately, I cannot give a cite since these were all IRS audit or plan compliance issues which were not reportable and which I no longer have the documents. 1 of the cases was my personal case, in another I did the IRS audit representation. That is why I have some insight.

AndyH I hope that it was only the eggnog kicking in so early. ????

The POP Plan is only 1 of the issues that have come up. Another issue is whether or not the premiums that are being paid for the owners are being properly treated. It is still not clear what the entity structures are. A response that "It's not a pass-through entity and not an S corp" but which does not state what it is, suggests to me, that what it is might not really be known. If it is not known what it is maybe it is not known for sure what is is not. There is also the issue of classes. While it might be allowable to have no section 125 plan for the owners while having a section 125 plan for the POP for the NHCEs, it is quite possible that they are all under a single health plan. Can a single health plan have such classification or should it be 2 separate health plans? What does the Cafeteria Plan Plan Document allow? What does the Health Plan Plan Document allow? Additionally, if this is under a group policy Is the insurer aware of this premium structure and is it acceptable? Additionally, If this is a small group (under 50 employees) this arrangement could very well be not allowed under state Small Group Health Insurance laws.

Cites for what particular item? Reasonable compensation ? Services without compensation or Working without pay? Non-employee working in business? Board of Directors? Corporate by-laws? In general, www.irs.gov and www.ustaxcourt.gov There and a good taxation manual and a business law text should help you. Or just start with a Google search on things such as "reasonable compensation" "hiring your spouse" and you should a multitude of cites, references, opinions, examples and warnings. For example: http://taxes.about.com/od/scorporations/qt...onable_comp.htm http://www.revoptom.com/archive/DEPT/ro0500mgt.htm http://www.brookwoodtax.com/business_tax_g...your_spouse.htm If you need a couple court cases, let me know, I might find time to look in my archives.

Rollover HRAs are liabilities. Whether to be treated as current, short or long term depends on the plan design (forfeitures, caps etc) and other considerations such as employee turnover and expected claims. My answers have no relationship to FASB.

What is it ? What are the medical group and the Dr's practice structured as?

Since it is the IRS that is of concern with this issue, I do not think that it matters what the Census Bureau, BLS or such others might have as classifications. For this issue, I would go by the IRS rules etc which are very very clear, whether by ruling or court adjudication.

Why would rollover HRA funds be a carried as a long term liability? What guarantee or on what basis could it be determined when an employee might need all the funds or terminate employment? The funds have to be immediately and fully available on demand, don't they?

depends on what your function is and how much you need to CYA.An employer should not have an employee who gets a 1099. Employees get W2s. There have been recent cases of employers getting penalized for this sort of thing. Whatever that employee does could only be done either during regular working hours or after. If after there are not many ways for it not to be OT. Whatever job it is it is probably done under the direction of the employer and the person doing it would not qualify as an IC. If it is "royalties from publications or music they've created together" the payments would be coming to them (as partners/creators etc) from a licensee or user, not from this employer. A 1099 in that case would be from somewhere else. What is done that causes the 1099 versus what is done for the W2?

Do they really think that it is a good idea to have 1 employee who has what is really a different SPD and information package that is different from what all the other employees have? I would prefer that all employees have exactly the same package. I walso think that if a new SPD is actually produced and given to this employee it should also be given to all the others as soon as possible. At the next distribution of SPDs give everyone the same thing then.

I thought that only employees (or self-employed persons) are allowed to work (participate in the day to day activities) in a business. Even members of the Board of Directors cannot participate in the day to day activites. What makes a spouse able to participate? A person working for or participating in the day to day operating activities of a company must be an employee. Aside from the IRS see the by-laws etc of the company itself and ask your GL and WC insurers what is in those policies about employees and non-employees. Employees MUST be paid for services rendered.

Isn't the corporate structure of the medical practice important? Many medical practices are P.As within a larger P.A or S Corp. In either case a pass-through entity situation exists for tax purposes. The Drs are regarded as being either self- employed of more than 2% shareholders in an S Corp. If this is the case How can they participate in an employee health plan? And are the premiums being treated as income to them?

I do not think that you can have zero as a rate of pay. First there are the minimum wage laws, then there is the IRS issue of reasonable compensation. I would think that reasonable compensation would be even more a factor because of ownership attribution rules. She is the spouse of the owner, isn't she? Do attribution rules apply to Pension and PS Plans?